Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. M/S Ranta Fruit Co.

DRT21 Aug 2026OA/669/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of ₹78,34,570/- including interest under Section 19 of the RDB Act. The court found the bank proved its case regarding the loan facilities and granted permission to recover dues from mortgaged property, hypothecated vehicle, and other assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of ₹78,34,570/- with interest allowed; Recovery Certificate issued; Liability of defendants declared joint and several.

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Ranta Fruit Co. — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 669/2023

¶4

Date of Institution: 24.03.2023 Date of Decision: 21.08.2026

¶5

Punjab National Bank having its branches all over India and a branch at Parwanoo, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh.

¶6

……..Applicant

¶7

Vs.

¶8

M/s Ranta Fruit Co., through its proprietor Sh. Hans Raj Ranta s/o Sh. Kundan Lal Ranta

¶9

FAD No.1, Fruit Terminal Market, Sector-6, Parwanoo, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh.

¶10

Sh. Hans Raj Ranta s/o Sh. Kundan Lal Ranta, proprietor of M/s Ranta Fruit Co.

¶11

1^st Address: # Village Daroti, P.O. Tikker, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh.

¶12

2^nd Address: # Village Kather, P.O. Chambaghat, Tehsil and District Solan, Himachal Pradesh.

¶13

Sh. Jaswant Singh s/o Sh. Tek Chand, r/o Village Kadiwan, Tehsil Rohru, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh.

¶14

Sh. Vimal Chauhan s/o Sh. Tek Chand, r/o Village Kadiwan, Tehsil Rohru, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh.

¶15

Sh. Narveer Singh Chauhan s/o Sh. Kedar Singh, r/o Village Karchari, Via Tikker, P.O. Sheel, Tehsil Rohru, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh.

¶16

Sh. Rajesh Chand s/o Sh. Bhagat Singh, r/o Village Sheel, Tehsil District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh.

¶17

……….Defendants

¶18

Advocates

¶19

Sh. R.K. Joshi, Counsel for the applicant bank along with Mr. Harpreet Singh, Deputy Manager.

¶20

None for the defendants.

¶21

OA for the Recovery of ₹78,34,570/- with interest from 24.03.2023.

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Punjab National Bank has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the

¶24

¶25

recovery of ₹78,34,570/- with interest against M/s Ranta Fruit Co. and others (defendants).

¶26

Bank’s case is that on 31.08.2015, it had granted a loan of ₹50.00 Lacs to defendant No.1 through its proprietor defendant No.2 in the form of C.C Limit for Business purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant Nos.3 and 4 mortgaged their property (fully detailed in para No.5.6 of the application). Defendant Nos.3 and 4 stood as guarantors for the C.C. Limit vide Agreement of Guarantee dated 31.08.2015. The C.C. Limit was chargeable to interest @10.65% per annum with monthly rests.

¶27

2A. On 15.09.2015, at the request of the defendants, bank granted a loan of ₹10.00Lacs to defendant no.1 through its proprietor defendant no.2 for Vehicle purpose. To secure the Vehicle loan, defendant No.2 had hypothecated vehicle bearing registration No. HP-64A-0671 (fully detailed in hypothecation agreement {Exhibit A-14} of the application). Defendant Nos.5 and 6 stood as guarantors for the vehicle loan vide Agreement of Guarantee dated 15.09.2015. The vehicle loan Lacs was chargeable to interest @9.25% with monthly rests. Defendants had duly acknowledged their liability towards the debt on 10.10.2017, 23.03.2018, 08.03.2019, 04.03.2022, 06.10.2017, 08.03.2019 and 04.03.2022. At the time of filing of the application, a sum of ₹78,34,570/- was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application. 3. On 04.05.2023, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendant nos. 1 and 2 put in appearance on 11.01.2024 and were directed to file their Written Statement and Affidavit of Assets within 30 days. The summonses were sent to the remaining Defendants again. The Service of the Defendants

¶28

¶29

was completed on 27.03.2026. However, they did not put in appearance despite service.

¶30

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Subhash Lohat, Senior Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-32.

¶31

I have perused the evidence on the record. Mr. Harpreet Singh, Deputy Manager is present along with the original documents which have been perused by me. The same have been returned to him after perusal. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the total loan of ₹60.00 Lacs (₹50.00 Lacs in C.C. Limit and ₹10.00 Lacs in Vehicle Loan) and at the time of filing of the application, a sum of ₹78,34,570/- was due.

¶32

Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of ₹78,34,570/- (Rupees Seventy Eight Lacs Thirty Four Thousand Five Hundred Seventy Only) i.e. ₹73,51,400/- in C.C. Limit with interest @10.65% p.a. and ₹4,83,170/- in Vehicle Loan with interest @9.25% p.a. (both facilities) with monthly rests from 24.03.2023, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of defendant nos. 1 to 4 would be joint and several for the amount due in the C.C. Limit. The Liability of Defendant nos. 1, 2, 5 and 6 would be joint and several for the amount due in the Vehicle Loan. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged property and hypothecated vehicle fully detailed in para No5.6 of the application and hypothecation agreement {Exhibit A- 14} respectively as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶33

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.

¶34

Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.

¶35

¶36

Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 24.09.2026.

¶37

A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties. Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 21.08.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

Punjab National Bank v. M/S Ranta Fruit Co.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. M/S Ranta Fruit Co.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bank of Baroda versus Radhakrishnan

Anil Kumawat versus Tata Capital Housing Fiannce Ltd.

M S Wasan Shoes Ltd. versus Canara Bank

State Bank of India versus Ms Kritima Fuel Service and Ors.

Sadhana Anup Patil versus Icici Home Finance Company Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Shri Sahib Ram